WORLD WORLDWIDE ITALY News Journal Update - (en) Italy, FDCA, Il Cantiere #19: France-Trade Unionism: What conclusions can be drawn from the struggles against the pension reform? - Plateforme Communiste Libertaire (2 June 2023) (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 The social movement against the 2023 pension reform immediately started

very strongly, surprising everyone with 2 million demonstrators on
January 19th. Many of them had never gone on strike or demonstrated
before. However, we couldn't get him to take the next step. What
provisional assessment can we draw from this and what prospects for the
future of this movement? ---- It was therefore a question of "not losing
the best years of one's life", of "not dying at work" or simply not
waiting for retirement without work or on disability, given that the
employment rate between 60 and 62 years is ridiculously low Today. The
government's repeated lies regarding women, the alleged minimum pensions
of EUR1,200 and their arrogance have further strengthened opposition
among more than 80% of workers.

As we analyzed in July 2022(1), the relationship with work is what made
it possible to mobilize workers against this reform in the first place.
Today, 39% of workers and employees, regardless of gender, consider
their work unsustainable and think they won't make it until
retirement(2). However, this rejection is more pronounced among women,
at 41%. The transition from 62 to 64 years of age, the lack of
consideration for long careers or the automatic absorption of 8
trimesters per child for women were seen as profoundly unfair.

Overcoming the 64 year old question

The demands in the demonstrations and in the trade union communiques
were therefore concentrated on the 64 years old. The trade unions, on
the other hand, only agreed on this point. However, there were many more
requests to feature! First of all, the reform is not limited to 64 years
of age. In particular, it worsens the Touraine reform by lengthening the
contribution period and eliminates some special regimes. But the
question of pensions is above all an extraordinary starting point for
broadening demands and freeing work from the chains of capital(3).

Let us remember first of all that the very principle of Social Security
is a threat to capitalism. It removes solidarity from the capitalist
market through social contributions. The employers never stop trying to
get their hands on this treasure with the support of various
governments. And the various measures have been accumulating for years.
Today, for example, employers pay almost no payroll contributions below
1.5 times the minimum wage. The lack of income for Social Security funds
is compensated by taxes, so with our money - we are doubly deceived.

Conclusions: the money given by the State to exempt companies from
contributions, i.e. 66 billion euros per year, is spent by companies not
to hire and invest, but to benefit shareholders. Therefore, for
shareholders of the CAC 40[stock index of the top 40 stocks on the Paris
stock exchange]alone in 2022, 80 billion has been diverted away from any
social purpose for the benefit of shareholders. If we took control of
that sum, this would more or less allow us to finance a pension at age
60 with 37.5 years of contributions. Because the current system is far
from satisfactory. Already today, retiring at 62 with a miserable
pension is the expression of a real and significant questioning of the
right to a pension. Therefore, the 64 years are just a further attack on
employed work.

But pensions, wages, employment, power in the company, health at work...
everything is connected. We could have built a stronger, both better
locally rooted and more global movement by explaining these connections.
But once again we are faced with the lack of activists, and with the
lack of training of militant collectives. Because today, after decades
of incessant media offensive by the bourgeoisie, it has become
complicated to explain that "the gross salary is not indifferent to us".

Trade union unity: a point in favor

Macron has chosen to favor the alliance with the right to pass his
project through the Assembly. Which in the end will fail, however
avoiding the vote of the motion of no confidence. He did not seek any
compromise with the trade unions, including the CFDT which had largely
supported him during his first mandate. It must be said that this
support has not been without internal turbulence.

While Macron was still Hollande's Economy Minister, the CGC was already
the first to resume the path of the opposition by joining the usual
CGT-FO-FSU-Solidaires axis. Then, between the two rounds of the 2022
legislative elections, the CFDT congressmen put Laurent Berger in the
minority by voting 67% against accepting an extension of the
contribution period. All this contributed to forging a complete trade
union unity, never seen since 2008. This was strengthened thanks to the
great mobilization of workers who took ownership of this unity.

The unity was achieved only at the age of 64. Let us remember that this
was the only point of common opposition to this reform. The CFDT
approved the Touraine reform and supported the abolition of the special
regimes. But in this movement each organization was free to bring its
own demands. There was also agreement not to criticize blockade actions
or strikes conducted by the organizations. Despite heavy pressure from
the media and government and some missteps by Laurent Berger, this deal
held up.

However, union unity appears to have been very weak on the ground. After
several decades of collaboration between employers and government, the
CFDT has struggled to find its way back to mobilization. She managed to
gather many people at the demonstrations, but did not lead the debate
company by company. And in general, there have been few inter-union
general meetings in the territory or in companies. It must be said that
for many union groups, we were emerging from a 2022 year of CSE
elections and public functions that saw unions clash with each other.
This could only complicate effective unity at the base, at least where
trade union groups still exist. Therefore, at times, CGT or Solidaires
groups were able to wait for the slightest misstep by the CFDT to
conclude that the movement was over.

Finally, the criticisms of the inter-union strategy seem to neglect the
main problem, namely the reality of the mobilization of workers. All the
conditions were favorable to try to push further forward, especially on
March 7 with the call to "stop the country". It wasn't a call for a
general strike, but it sounded a lot like one. But the workers were
mostly content to "sign with their feet" without committing themselves
more deeply to the struggle. This difficulty must be at the center of
reflections today and push us to rethink trade union strategies

The all-out strike: too ambitious a goal?

In light of the balance sheet of this movement, one can only question
the call for an all-out strike. For us, the all-out strike, guided by
general assemblies of strikers, remains a primary objective. Because
only such strikes allow a leap forward in terms of self-organization and
experience of struggle for workers. We can only note that this objective
has proven unachievable in light of the reality experienced by almost
all workers and their capacity for mobilization. It is clear today that
such an appeal entailed "putting the cart before the horse".

Only some sectors managed to join the all-out strike: energy, SNCF
(railways), refineries, waste management... But if these sectors have
blocking power and are visible, they represent a minority in the world
of work. For example, in France there are 160,000 railway workers,
140,000 in the energy sector, 15,000 port workers, 4,000 workers in
Total's refineries. This represents 1.2% of the workforce. Outside of
these sectors, the call for an all-out strike was in reality a strike by
proxy: it was about encouraging these sectors to maintain the strike.

Furthermore, even in these sectors the strike was difficult. For
example, at SNCF the strike was decided from above, with little
participation in the General Assemblies(5). The strike rate quickly
declined, although it remained strong among drivers, with nearly a third
of strikers continuously. But overall, it went from 40% on March 7,
2023, to 10% on March 10, and then to 15% during the national day of
action on March 15. Similarly, at EDF, over half of the employees went
on strike on 7 March, but only a third on 15 March. Waste collection
workers in Paris began the strike on March 6 with percentages close to
100%, but the blockade of the incinerators was interrupted three weeks
later due to a lack of strikers.

The arsenal of anti-strike laws has developed significantly in recent
decades. For example, the guaranteed minimum service for teachers, for
railway workers, as well as the Omont decree on weekends. In March, the
newspaper l'Humanité denounced the "guide to the repression of the right
to strike" (6) published by the services of Olivier Dussopt, Minister of
Labour. Trade union repression hit many strikers hard.

In fact, the main challenge in many companies was simply to succeed in
the next event. The mobilization was based on a limited number of
militants, with weak general assemblies and a very laborious expansion
of forces. While opposition to the project only grew, most workers,
around 70%, were convinced that the project would pass anyway. As a
result, they only got involved on mobilization days, sometimes taking
days off.

It was therefore difficult to push the mobilization further without
greater involvement of workers. In general, it has been difficult to
connect the demand for salary increases and the refusal to work longer
in companies. However, there was an opportunity to achieve victories in
companies and contribute to the deepening of the mobilization. It is
clear that the reduction of trade union activists and the loss of trade
union skills, as well as the general decline of political culture, have
not helped to develop a method of intervention to rely on mobilization,
even if only temporary.

Since the days of strike since March 7, some trade union activists have
organized blockade actions: of roads, industrial areas, etc. It was a
good strategy to help raise tension and to make the economic shutdown
the main issue to be addressed in order to win. These actions were also
widely supported by the population. But even in this case they relied on
a few people and the ambitions often had to be scaled back.

The current challenge: taking root in trade union deserts

All these observations must push us to rethink the trade union struggle.
Today, almost half of the world of work works in companies with fewer
than 50 employees, within which there are practically no trade union
rights and/or power to intervene in the CSE (Social and Economic
Committees[equivalent to our Company Trade Union Representatives]) .
This proportion is very high among male and female workers, as well as
between male and female employees. In many large companies, the
situation is not much better. While employees of contracting firms are
in contact with the union, this is not often the case among their
subcontractors.

All these workers, who practically never meet union activists in the
workplace, have however come out en masse into the streets in recent
months. It is precisely the lack of organization of these workers that
has prevented them from moving to the next phase in this movement, for
all the reasons mentioned above. Will trade unionism be able to
understand this serious deficiency and draw the consequences from it?

At the moment, we brag about successes. Take for example the strike in
very organized and "blocking" sectors such as the SNCF (the French
railways). But it is perhaps not to forget that trade unionism is almost
absent in numerous numerically important sectors, such as personal care,
construction, commerce..., among which some, such as logistics or road
transport, are very more "blockers" for the capitalist economy. The data
on electoral audiences by sector in 2021(7) are enlightening in this sense.

The budget of the CGT congress seems to have completely ignored the
challenges of the moment. The large corporate federations built on
corporate unionism, such as railway workers, energy..., have regained
control over the confederation. Red flags of social issues were raised
to build internal alliances, such as the issue of the relationship with
the collective "Plus jamais ça" ("Never like this again"). But one can
only question whether it was the federations that monopolized power
within the confederation and actually decided the direction. The
Departmental Unions, which should be working to root the CGT in trade
union deserts, have been virtually sidelined. Likewise,

The influx of new union members, 30,000 for the CGT and the CFDT,
forcefully raises the question of their reception, since they are often
workers from small companies where a union does not yet exist. Local
Unions alone cannot take on this responsibility alone, at least not
without strengthening the union resources allocated to them by the
unions. But it is also necessary to ask the question of the union
structure. Company unionism, practiced only by the CGT and Solidaires
and partly by FO, is no longer adequate at all, in particular to the
structure of the world of work and the explosion of work collectives due
to today's chain of subcontracting.

Sector unionism which brings together workers in the same sector on a
territorial basis, for example trade, metallurgy, construction, could be
an answer to this challenge. This would pool union resources and offer a
real framework for organizing workers in all these small businesses. On
the other hand, organizing all the people who work in the same place but
with different employers - think of site unions, experimented in a very
limited way by the CGT - would also allow us to rebuild work communities
and counteract divisions. Unfortunately, these experiences have not been
generalized nor evaluated collectively. Naturally,

What political alternatives?

The political and trade union movements acted without concertation
during this movement. La France insoumise tried to go beyond the
inter-union with a call to demonstrate on Saturday 21 January, which was
a resounding failure compared to the success of the union mobilization
of 19 January. Nupes therefore concentrated on parliamentary work. A
second moment of tension occurred during the debate on the law in the
National Assembly, with France insoumise's strategy of parliamentary
obstructionism. Today, no one can say what the result would have been if
there had been a vote at that time, but a vote in favor of the
government would undoubtedly have weakened the mobilization.

One thing is certain, gaining time made it possible to deepen the crisis
and arrive at the passage in force through article 49.3 of the
Constitution, which relaunched the mobilization. From this moment on,
the mobilization underwent some changes, with spontaneous
demonstrations, strong repression by the police, noisy protests,
disturbances to the movements of ministers... In our opinion, the trade
union organizations were too timid at that moment , when they could have
taken the initiative politically. It was neither a question of following
political organizations, nor of limiting oneself to mobilization in
companies, but of intervening directly on political issues.

Thus, after the use of article 49.3, the use of a shared initiative
referendum was taken into consideration to relaunch the mobilization.
Part of the trade union movement, often far-left militants, opposed it,
arguing that this would weaken the ongoing movement by returning power
to politicians. The PCF, on the other hand, presented this referendum as
a magic solution. It is clear that the only interest of such a
referendum would have been to force the government to reassert itself
and strengthen the use of Article 49.3. However, seizing the opportunity
unionically, making it a real focus in our workplaces, was a pertinent
prospect.

In general, the competition has now started with the Rassemblement
National (RN). The five-year term may not see it through to the end, and
we have an interest in maintaining control over social issues and
getting a resolution as soon as the opportunity arises, rather than
letting the usual smokescreens, such as racism, security, controversy
social media, triumph on social media and return to the foreground. This
would pave the way for the RN.

But this implies that we must remember, within our trade unions, that
the RN is a fraudulent social enterprise. For example, Marine Le Pen
declared in February on France Info: "The pension at 67 is already
better than it currently exists[...]because Emmanuel Macron has exploded
the debt, to 600 billion euros!". In her program, in fact, 67 years are
envisaged for all those who started working after the age of 25 or who
have not accumulated 42 years of contributions. On the other hand,
Geoffroy Roux de Bézieux, former president of Medef (French Business
Movement), stated in March: "The RN is a necessary risk, otherwise the
alternative is to do nothing, which we have done a lot to long in
France, which led to a huge mountain of debt."

The sequence we have just experienced has once again highlighted the
absence of an organization and/or a political coalition that places
class issues at the center of its debates and activities, that organizes
first of all militants with a mass practice , which politicizes the
articulation of claims and collective action and highlights the
necessary confrontation with the ruling class.

This is what we want to contribute to, the lack is so evident.

Note

(1).https://plateformecl.org/luttes-de-classes-retraites-faisons-le-point-sur-le-travail/

(2)
https://lejournal.cnrs.fr/articles/les-conditions-de-travail-se-degradent-depuis-les-annees-1990

Ditto Notes 1

(3)
https://www.lemonde.fr/politique/article/2022/06/16/retraites-les-militants-de-la-cfdt-bousculent-laurent-berger-leur-numero-un_6130656_823448.html

(4) https://www.contretemps.eu/congres-cgt-democratie-syndicalisme/

(5)
https://www.humanite.fr/social-eco/droit-de-greve/revelation-le-ministere-du-travail-ouvre-la-chasse-aux-syndicalistes-grevistes-788023

(6) https://www.aefinfo.fr/assets/medias/documents/5/0/507398.pdf

Alternativa Libertaria/FdCA Il Cantiere #19 settembre 2023
ilcantiere@autistici.org http://alternativalibertaria.fdca.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca